Promoting Sustainable Mobility: A Walkability Analysis for School Zone Safety

Abstract

Promoting sustainable mobility and planning walkable school zones is a pressing priority, as it involves the movement of Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs), such as children aged 5–19, along with adult companions, parents, and school staff or faculty. If these children have a safe walking experience today, they will grow up to become ambassadors of sustainable mobility. In this study, several school zone areas were considered in the capital city of India, Delhi. To conduct a comprehensive walkability analysis, three distinct methods were employed: a stakeholder survey, an evaluation of existing walkable corridors, and a microscopic simulation using the Social Force Model (SFM). The limited focus on school zone safety issues in developing nations presents a case for studying the specific concerns of the school zone pedestrians, aiming to assess the magnitude of the problem, provide design centric solutions, and pick an efficient solution for implementation. The results highlight the parameters influencing pedestrian safety in school zones and their effect on pedestrian attributes. This research work can be replicated for school zone safety assessments across the world. This study will benefit the policymakers, urban planners, local government agencies, and traffic management professionals by assisting them in evaluating the walkability of school zones and promoting sustainable mobility choices.

1. Motivation

Sustainable mobility promotes equitable transportation and mobility for all types of road users including pedestrians, bicyclists, micromobility users, people with disabilities, and Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs) like the elderly, and children. The safety of VRUs, such as children, in school zones is a concern for urban planners, traffic engineers, governments, and parents worldwide. For school-going children and young adults aged 5–19 years, a safe, sustainable, and walkable environment is essential to ensure their freedom to travel from home to school, and to playgrounds in and around the school zone. School zones are regions frequently used by children and parents, and are often bustling with traffic during drop-off and pick-up times. School-going children are categorized as VRUs, and their safety is crucial in an urban environment with higher vehicular movement [1,2,3].

Worldwide, injuries from road crashes are one of the top causes of death among children of 5–19 years of age. A significant proportion of these deaths happens in low or middle-income countries. As per UNICEF 2022 data, annually, nearly 220,000 children and adolescents lose their lives in road accidents. Road crashes are a top safety concern for school-going children and teenagers aged 5–19. More than 600 children and teenagers die on the roads every single day, or approximately one young life is lost every two minutes. These preventable tragedies highlight the urgent need for improved road safety measures to protect our most vulnerable populations and promote safe and sustainable mobility through walking [4]. In India, based on a report by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORTH), 9528 children under 18 years of age lost their lives in road crashes in 2022 [5,6]. Data released by the non-profit organization Save Life Foundation, Delhi reveal there were 43 child deaths every single day in road crashes in 2018. Around 38,000 of these crashes took place near schools [7]. This clearly emphasizes the need to re-design school zones in developing nations with safe, sustainable, and walkable infrastructure to reduce crash incidents involving children in school zones.

Walkability is defined as the degree to which the built environment provides safe and accessible infrastructure for pedestrian movement. Walkable infrastructure eventually attracts more pedestrians [8,9,10,11]. It is imperative to ensure the safeguarding of sustainable mobility modes and environments to give captive riders like children the freedom of movement. Walkable school zones are a boon for children and parents while minimizing safety concerns and augmenting the walking experience. They promote sustainable travel and active and healthy lifestyle choices, and reduce vehicular congestion. However, the implementation of walkable infrastructure varies significantly across different urban settings, influenced by socio-economic factors, urban planning practices, and cultural attitudes towards non-motorized transport. The use of non-motorized transport, and its impact on sustainability, are key to achieving climate goals at the current time.

Delhi is India’s capital city, with a population of 35 million and more than 7000 schools, making it an ideal setting to assess walkability in school zones. South Delhi was selected for this study due to its unique urban characteristics. As a dense mixed land-use region with prestigious institutional areas and significant traffic congestion, South Delhi presents a complex environment where pedestrian safety is often compromised. Despite being accessible by multimodal public transportation choices, the region’s infrastructure has not kept pace with its rapid vehicular growth, leading to conflicts between motorized and non-motorized road users. The diversity in land use, ranging from residential and commercial areas to institutional spaces, makes it a representative microcosm for studying pedestrian behavior and safety in varied urban settings. Moreover, South Delhi’s combination of well-developed areas alongside underdeveloped pedestrian facilities underscores the need to examine school zone safety more closely, especially considering the high volume of school-going children who navigate this environment daily. The region was assessed for walkable, safe, sustainable, and accessible routes in school zones, but the lack of adequate sidewalks, crossing facilities, and traffic-calming measures intensifies the risks young pedestrians face. Thus, South Delhi serves as a critical case study to develop and validate methodologies that can be applied in other high-density urban areas globally. These missing geometric design elements significantly increase risks for young pedestrians. A walkability inventory study conducted as part of this research work included 22 school zones in South Delhi (shown in Figure 1), and the results revealed that many lacked basic pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks and pedestrian guardrails. Even where such infrastructure existed, it was often unsafe or needed maintenance.

2. Literature Review

The literature reveals that the safety of child pedestrians globally is critical to VRU safety. Several attributes, such as roadway geometric design elements, sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, crosswalks, guardrails, traffic signs, traffic management interventions, and calming measures, can significantly enhance the walking experience in school zones. One of the concerns affecting pedestrian safety in school zones is the absence of safe crossing facilities. An inadequate number of or absent pedestrian crossings force children to cross the streets at unsafe locations, increasing the risk of accidents. Chaotic traffic conditions, where vehicles frequently violate speed limits and other regulations, add to the problem. Research has shown that implementing well-designed pedestrian crossings, appropriate signage, and speed-calming measures can significantly reduce pedestrian injuries and fatalities [8,11]. Milad et al. [12] mentioned that the presence of pedestrian infrastructure, sustainable environment in terms of infrastructure, and accessibility to public transit can significantly enhance the affinity towards active transport for school travel. Similarly, the availability of pedestrian crossings is vital for maintaining a safe crossing environment for children and influences the travel mode choice decisions [13]. The presence of traffic control devices and guardrails near schools can remarkably impact vehicle speeds and their compliance with safety regulations in school zones [14]. Understanding all design attributes is essential for designing safer and walkable school zones.

Evaluating the existing pedestrian safety status quo involves evaluating the physical infrastructure and the school community’s perceptions. Many studies have used perception-based surveys to measure the awareness and apprehension of parents, students, and school staff. For example, Shailaja Tetali et al. [15] conducted a survey to understand the mode of travel and the allied safety perceptions among school children and their parents. They found that children from low-income households were likelier to walk or cycle to school in areas devoid of vital infrastructure, creating a concerning scenario. Similarly, Nasrudin N. et al. [16] found that parents’ school travel safety concerns significantly influenced the transportation mode choice for children. These findings highlight the need to involve the school community, including children, parents, school staff, faculty, and non-profit advocacy groups, in identifying and addressing pedestrian safety issues.

The adequacy and present condition of pedestrian infrastructure are decisive factors in guaranteeing safety in school zones. Xuemei Zhu et al. [17] have underlined the disparities in infrastructure quality, particularly in areas with higher poverty levels. Such neighborhoods often lack an adequate number of sidewalks and pedestrian crossings. Also, the quality, condition, and availability of traffic-calming devices, such as speed bumps and rumble strips, are important in reducing vehicular speeds in school zones [18]. The presence of proper traffic signs and the enforcement of vehicular speed limits are also vital in providing a safe, walkable environment for child pedestrians and adults in the school zone areas. These infrastructural elements must be systematically analyzed to identify gaps and the scope for enhancement for each school zone improvement project.

Enhancing the infrastructure in school zones can significantly improve pedestrian safety and walkability. Microscopic simulation tools like PTV Vissim/Viswalk help analyze the effect of proposed changes and their influence on pedestrian walking behavior. One of the most negative influences is the drastic reduction in school-goers wanting to walk, which leads to fewer adoptions of sustainable mobility options. For example, road geometric changes, installation of traffic-calming measures, innovative traffic management techniques, traffic signage near pedestrian crossings to alert motorized road users, or built environment modifications can be simulated to observe their impact on pedestrian behavior and, eventually, the pedestrian mode choice. Jones et al. [19] highlighted the importance of considering the built environment and local routes while planning the school zone transportation infrastructure. Also, best practices from globally successful case studies, like designated protected sidewalks and school zone vehicular speed limits, can be assessed for their efficacy in reducing accidents and improving pedestrian safety along with community-based efforts like awareness campaigns through various types of media and educative programs for safety education including 3D models of traffic scenarios, board games, posters, flip charts, table-top simulations, etc. [20,21,22]. The practical tools like microscopic simulation-based evaluation provide a technology-driven and effective method for pre-testing these modification scenarios before implementation, ensuring they meet the desired safety results [23,24,25]. Deluka-Tibljaš et al. (2022) conducted a comprehensive literature review on child pedestrian safety at crosswalks, identifying key infrastructural and behavioral factors that influence pedestrian safety. The findings emphasize the need for tailored safety measures, which align with our study’s focus on improving walkability in school zones [26].

Enhancing the safety of school zones and creating pedestrian-friendly infrastructure may encourage active commuting for children, especially those who live at shorter distances from the school, and eventually promote sustainable mobility practices [19,27,28,29,30]. School zones not only need an accessible and safe pedestrian infrastructure leading to the school from different approaches but also need nearby recreational facilities like parks, playgrounds, pools, running tracks, fields, courts, etc., to be encompassed in a safe school zone for the children to be able to safely access these facilities for their all-round development [31]. Damian et al. [32] introduced a concept of adult companions for school trips to ensure safety and called it the walking school bus, which is good for countries like Auckland or the USA, where school zone safety rules prioritize child pedestrian safety. In India, most children above the age of eight reach school by bus, auto, or van, or they cycle up to the school from nearby neighborhoods or even walk by themselves to reach school if their home is within walkable distance. In such scenarios, it becomes important to create a sustainable, safe, and walkable infrastructure for children to be able to navigate with or without adult companions. Anderson C. et al. [33] concluded from their study conducted in Los Angeles that pedestrian crashes near school zones are critical elements to understand when planning for and designating school zone areas as safe or unsafe. For rural areas, the restrictions on vehicular speed have become a more stringent yet effective strategy to reduce child pedestrian crashes [34]. A study by Ištoka Otković et al. (2021) developed models for predicting children pedestrian crossing speeds at signalized crosswalks using neural networks and multiple linear regression. This research is pertinent as it validates models across different cities, showcasing the potential for replicability and reliability in pedestrian behavior analysis [35].

School zone safety research highlights the aspects requiring attention. Physical infrastructure like sidewalks and crossings can be provided, but that does not fully address how engaging the community and raising awareness can improve safety around school zones [12,13,23]. The community can act as guardians of the present infrastructure and be aware citizens in matters of urban development and upcoming projects in nearby regions close to or within school zone areas. Moreover, although traffic-calming measures are known to be effective [18], we do not have enough information about how well these solutions are accepted and sustained over time by the community. An additional gap is the lack of in-depth studies on how socio-economic factors influence pedestrian safety for children [17]. Also, the investigation of pedestrian walkability misses out on several attributes, such as pedestrian volumes, walking speed, vehicular speeds, and pedestrian crossings [22]. Lastly, progressive modeling and technology-driven microscopic simulation tools and models are underutilized to assess the impact of changes in school zones, which could provide valuable insights through scenario comparison for making these areas safer [24]. Addressing these gaps is crucial for creating a holistic understanding of safeguarding child and adult pedestrians in school zones. This will promote the use of non-motorized sustainable travel practices.

The primary research question includes the role of the school zone communities and their concerns, perspectives, and awareness of their role in shaping the school zone in collaboration with the authorities. Another important issue to ponder is the approach toward school zone safety enhancement projects, the level of detail, and the need for a standard protocol for each school zone walkability infrastructure enhancement project. Pre-testing alternatively modified scenarios to adjudge their effects using pedestrian microscopic modeling can save each stakeholder organization tons of effort in understanding post-implementation pedestrian behavior. This can increase the efficiency of a walkability analysis.

The key contribution of this study is to establish a protocol for assessing walkability and test different scenarios to enhance the design of the school zone area and make it friendlier for Vulnerable Road Users(VRUs) like children, teenagers, and adults. This can be replicated for all school zone enhancement projects across cities and countries and make a strong case in favor of sustainable mobility practices.

3. Data Collection, Methodology, and Results

The research methodology adopted is as follows: First, an attempt has been made to identify the key attributes contributing to walkability and pedestrian safety through a literature review. Second, a stakeholder perception survey was designed to understand the perspectives on school zone pedestrian safety and walkability in the selected school zones. The stakeholder perception survey was designed after careful evaluation of previous studies and evaluation of the currently available literature on walkability studies. The questionnaire design ensured adequate framing of questions and a short length to facilitate respondents. Organizations such as iRAP (International Road Assessment Programme), the non-profit Save-Life Foundation and their previously conducted works on school zones and safety were also studied before questionnaire development. The reliability of the questionnaire was addressed through careful review by domain experts and pre-testing with a small subset of respondents to ensure clarity and consistency in understanding the questions. This pre-testing helped identify any ambiguous or unclear items, which were subsequently refined based on feedback. Additionally, the questionnaire included control questions to detect inconsistent responses and assess the reliability of participant answers. This will highlight the perspectives and concerns of faculty, parents, school staff, and school-going children on the current state of walkability. Third, 22 school zones were selected for a comprehensive walkability inventory study. This was to help assess the non-availability or availability of pedestrian infrastructure, and the quality and condition of the existing facilities from a safe, walkable perspective. Fourth, pedestrian and vehicular volume and speed data were collected for the school zones. Fifth, one school was selected for a detailed investigation using the SFM model in the PTV Vissim/Viswalk environment. This was conducted by utilizing all the school zone inventory information collected above, along with the pedestrian volume count, vehicular volume count, and vehicular and pedestrian speed data, to create a microscopic simulation model for one school, the Heritage School, Vasant Kunj, and further analyze the Heritage School zone area for an existing base scenario and a modified re-design scenario by changing the road geometric, traffic-calming, and management specifications as per guidelines from Indian Roads Congress (IRC) and Indo-HCM [36,37,38,39,40,41,42]. Working with the SFM simulation model helps observe how modifying the school zone’s geometric parameters and traffic signage using microscopic simulation influences pedestrian metrics and walkability.

Table 1 lists the schools selected for the school zone inventory analysis. The set of schools includes private schools, government schools, primary schools, playschools, and a special school for visually challenged children. Some schools are near an intersection, a busy commercial area, a residential area, a temple, a hospital, a curve on a busy road, a university, or a market area. Schools were selected based on their unique positionings that could be captured in their school zones.

After the schools were selected, a walkability perception survey was conducted. The population of the South Delhi district at the time of the survey was 2,258,367, taken from the website of the National Capital Territory of Delhi. (https://dmsouth.delhi.gov.in/about-district/, accessed on 27 August 2024) Considering a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error, the required sample size to conduct this survey was 385. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed across the 22 selected schools. With the help of school principals, 382 completed questionnaires were received, resulting in a response rate of 76%. Further, after filtering, only 350 questionnaires were found suitable for analysis.

The results from the perception survey included demographic details and a question about whether the visibility of schools could be increased with the help of simple interventions. In total, 35.70% respondents felt that informative signs could help increase the visibility of schools, which is essential to mark the territory as a slow-speed school zone for vehicular movement, 31.10% believed that proper installation and maintenance of traffic signs could improve school visibility, and 33.20% of the respondents believed that road marking or traffic-calming measures could help enhance the visibility of school zones. When asked whether the schools allocated a supervisor to the children during pick-up and drop-off times, only 28% responded affirmatively. Further, whether parents or adult companions accompany the children, 38% responded affirmatively. Another question was regarding the availability of pedestrian crossings, and 67% of small intersections approaching the school zone had a pedestrian crossing available.

The other noticeable results from the perception survey can be seen in Figure 2. Here, 40% of students come to school choosing the walk mode, highlighting the necessity of making school zones more walkable. 42.2% of respondents felt that the cars driving in and around the school zone area are faster. Few respondents found the drop-off and pick-up easy to access amidst traffic chaos and congestion. This can greatly improve if stringent enforcement is implemented for drop-off and pick-up times in school zones. A larger share of the school children was being dropped off outside the school boundaries, and there was a lack of any proper drop-off area or a walkable pathway leading to the school. This can be dangerous given the heterogeneous nature of vehicular traffic in India.

After the perception survey was conducted, inventory data were collected in the school zone areas for the 22 schools selected. Figure 3 shows the inventory analysis results, which clearly indicate that the non-availability of infrastructure outweighs the infrequent availability of safe infrastructure that can help pedestrians walk in all 22 school zones. Traffic-calming measures like rumble strips were absent in front of almost all schools, and although some schools had pedestrian sidewalks, they were not protected by any guardrails to separate the walking children from vehicular traffic.

Due to a shortage of time and funds, the pedestrian volume count survey was conducted for only 16 schools. The pedestrian morning and evening peak volumes are shown in Figure 4 below. Given the enrollment numbers in each school, each school had a significant number of pedestrian activities around the school zone area. Even when the infrastructure is unsafe, the higher number of pedestrians indicates a great opportunity to encourage more pedestrian activity if a safe and accessible infrastructure is created for the children and adults in the school zones.

Further, Figure 5 shows the situation of the school zone pedestrian facilities for some of the schools included in this study, from broken sidewalks needing re-construction and maintenance to two-wheeler parking in the sidewalk area, as seen in some school zones. Sustainable mobility practices and walkability cannot flourish in such scenarios. Basic walking infrastructure will need to be implemented, and further enhancements will need to be planned to augment the safe design and provide a better walkable experience for these school zone areas.

The Heritage School in Vasant Kunj was chosen for microscopic scenario-based simulation using the SFM model in the PTV Vissim/Viswalk environment. The current width of the sidewalk is 2.5 m near the Heritage School, with a one-sided parking facility. The traffic near the school is spread on a two-lane undivided road, and the nearest intersection is a three-legged intersection at Abdul Ghaffar Khan Marg. No speed management is available, and the road condition is fairly good. Figure 6 shows the region near the Heritage School considered for school zone walkability analysis using microscopic simulation.

The simulation was performed in an attempt to understand the effect of increasing the sidewalk width to 3.5 m (from 2.5 m originally). A guardrail to protect the child pedestrians from vehicular traffic was provided. Several protruding trees in the base scenario were on the sidewalk, acting as obstacles; the trees were removed and planted on one side in the re-design scenario. The pedestrian crossing in the base scenario was only a zebra crossing (crosswalk), but in the re-design scenario, it was replaced by a signal controller for pedestrians along with a crosswalk. No speed-calming measures were present in the base scenario, but speed bumps and adequate traffic signs for slowing down motorized vehicles were included in the re-design scenario. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the model scenarios as explained above.

The morning and afternoon peak-hour pedestrian counts in both directions to and from the Abdul Gaffar Khan Marg were observed separately, and the average of 830 pedestrians was considered as an input in the model. The vehicle counts from Chhatarpur Metro station towards Vasant Kunj were found to be 2403.7 PCUs (passenger car units). Vehicular traffic from Vasant Kunj towards Chhatarpur metro station was 2583.4 PCUs. The vehicular count toward the Heritage School from Abdul Gaffar Khan Marg was 396.8 PCUs, and 412.5 PCUs in the opposite direction.

The results from the simulation exercise are shown in Figure 9. It can be seen that there is a notable increase in the space available to pedestrians from 0.18 m/s² to 0.26 m/s². Hence, the walkable speed of pedestrians increased from 3.973 m/s (approx. 4 m/s) m/s to 4.382 m/s (approx. 4.4 m/s), and at the same time, the speed of vehicles declined from 32 kmph to 23.8 kmph due to the re-design interventions. This helps us understand the impact and effect of changing the design attributes of school zones before implementation. Several scenarios can be compared before finalizing a decision. An optimized design can be chosen if needed in a specific school zone walkability enhancement project.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

This study’s results show a marked improvement in pedestrian safety with specific design interventions. The microscopic simulation analysis revealed that increasing the sidewalk width from 2.5 m to 3.5 m led to a 44.4% reduction in pedestrian–vehicular conflicts and a 10.5% increase in pedestrian walking speed from 3.97 m/s to 4.38 m/s. Additionally, the inclusion of traffic-calming measures, such as speed bumps and enhanced signage, resulted in a significant 26% decrease in average vehicular speeds from 32 km/h to 23.8 km/h. These outcomes suggest that even minor geometric and infrastructural modifications can yield substantial safety benefits. The perception survey data indicated that only 38% of respondents felt comfortable with existing infrastructure, reinforcing the need for further enhancements. The high percentage of respondents advocating for improved signage (31.1%) and road markings (33.2%) is aligned with the simulation findings, which demonstrated that better-defined pedestrian spaces reduce vehicular speeds and promote a safer walking environment. These quantifiable improvements suggest that the integration of targeted interventions based on simulation results and community feedback can significantly enhance pedestrian safety in school zones.

The walkability analysis in school zones presented in this study is unique in its approach, combining perception surveys, walkability inventories, and microscopic simulations to provide a holistic view of pedestrian safety. The proposed methodology not only identifies critical areas for intervention but also evaluates the effectiveness of different safety measures before implementation, ensuring the adaptability of the protocol in various urban contexts. This study also helps identifying the scope of improvement for enhancing the walkability for Vulnerable Road Users like children and adults in the school zones. The perception surveys helped uncover noteworthy concerns from parents, faculty, and school students about vehicle speeds and the lack of safe, walkable infrastructure near schools. The inventory survey identified the need and scope for improvement in the school zones. Pedestrian volume counts revealed substantial walking mode share in school zones. The microscopic simulation revealed the impacts on pedestrian behavior in the school zones with increased walking speeds and a vehicular speed reduction of up to 10 km/h due to interventions in the re-design scenario evaluated by the SFM model.

The findings underline the need for coordination between planners, government agencies, and stakeholders to make school zones more walkable in South Delhi and increase the share of walking trips beyond 40%, promoting sustainable mobility and healthier lifestyles in the school zone region for child pedestrians as well as adults. This study provides meaningful insights into walkability and safety in school zones, but certain aspects can be further explored. The analysis was conducted in a specific district. Future research can extend the methodology to diverse urban areas for broader validation. Additionally, while the Social Force Model (SFM) simulation effectively captures pedestrian behavior, incorporating additional behavioral variables can enhance its accuracy. Although this study did not employ statistical reliability tests such as Cronbach’s Alpha due to limitations in time and resources, future research can incorporate statistical tests, such as Cronbach’s Alpha and Factor Analysis, to further validate the internal consistency and reliability of the questionnaire across diverse respondent groups.

Collaborating with local authorities to apply these findings will contribute to safer school zones, enhancing pedestrian safety and encouraging sustainable travel practices. A comprehensive approach guided by the Four E’s: Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation is beneficial and essential to address these issues. This study can benefit policymakers, urban planners, and local governments. It highlights the walkability and pedestrian safety situation in urban Indian settings, especially in often-overlooked school zones, and offers an effective methodological protocol for analyzing the walkability in school zones.

Author Contributions

M.S. contributed to conceptualizing this study and writing this paper. C.P. collected data from the site locations and conducted PTV Vissim modeling. S.S. helped with the literature review and data analysis. M.J. contributed with her advisory remarks and enhancing this study. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due to not a legislatively mandatory practice in India where the case study has been investigated.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent is not a legislatively mandatory practice in India where the case study has been investigated.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to the principals of schools involved in this study for helping us collect perception data and conduct the inventory survey. We would also like to thank iRAP, India for initial discussions with us and sharing their insights.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Table

Figure 1. Map showing the South Delhi Region with 22 schools selected for walkability inventory study (Source: prepared by authors using ArcGIS Pro3.2).

Figure 2. Perception survey from 350 respondents.

Figure 3. State of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure around school zones.

Figure 4. Pedestrian volume survey results for 16 schools.

Figure 5. Condition of sidewalks in selected school zones. (Photographs by Research Team).

Figure 6. The school zone area used for microscopic simulation near Heritage School, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi (Source: generated using PTV Vissim Software (thesis version) during analysis).

Figure 7. Base scenario model (Source: generated using PTV Vissim Software during analysis).

Figure 8. Re-design scenario model (Source: generated using PTV Vissim Software during analysis).

Figure 9. Results from the microscopic simulation model and comparison of base scenario and re-design scenario.

Table 1

Schools in South Delhi selected for Study.

South Delhi, Selected School Zones
1. Amity International School (Location: Saket M Block, Saket Road)
2. Apeejay School (Location: J-Block, Saket Road, Gurudwara Road)
3. Asha Hai (Location: Hauz Khas, Hauz Khas Road)
4. BND Public School (Location: Katwaria Sarai)
5. DAV Model School (Location: Yusuf Sarai, Aurobindo Marg)
6. DPS RK Puram (Location: RK Puram, Sector 12, Kaifi Azmi Marg)
7. General Raj Public School (Location: Yusuf Sarai, Balbir Saxena Marg)
8. Gyan Jyoti Public School (Location: Chhatarpur, Shivalaya Road)
9. Ishani Government Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya (Location: Saket, Saket Road)
10. Kendriya Vidyalaya (Location: Old JNU Campus, Ber Sarai, Baba Gang Nath Marg)
11. Laxman Public School (Location: Near Hauz Khas Metro Station, Outer Ring Road, and Sri Krishna Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Marg)
12. Learning Tree Play School (Location: Malviya Nagar, Late Tirath Ram Sharma Marg)
13. Little Millennium (Location: Neb Sarai, IGNOU Main Road)
14. The Mother’s International School (Location: Kalu Sarai, Sri Aurobindo Marg)
15. SDMC Primary School, Hauz Khas (Location: Hauz Khas Village, Hauz Khas Fort Road)
16. SDMC Primary Co-Edu School (Location: Adhchini, Near NCERT, Sri Aurobindo Marg)
17. St. Anthony Senior Secondary School (Location: Safdarjung Development Area, Hauz Khas, Jaideep Road)
18. Saint Anthony Pre-Primary School (Location: Safdarjung Development Area, Hauz Khas, Jaideep Road)
19. St. Mary’s Junior School (Location: Neb Sarai, IGNOU Main Road)
20. St. Paul’s School (Location: Safdarjung Development Area, Hauz Khas, Gate No 1 Road)
21. The Heritage School (Location: Vasant Kunj, Abdul Gaffar Khan Marg)
22. World of Kid Play School (Location: Chhatarpur, Chhatarpur Temple Road)

References

1. Elvik, R.; Mysen, A. Incomplete Accident Reporting: Meta-Analysis of Studies Made in 13 Countries. Transp. Res. Rec.; 1999; 1665, pp. 133-140. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1665-18]

2. Sosik-Filipiak, K.; Osypchuk, O. Identification of Solutions for Vulnerable Road Users Safety in Urban Transport Systems: Grounded Theory Research. Sustainability; 2023; 15, 10568. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su151310568]

3. Reyes-Muñoz, A.; Guerrero-Ibáñez, J. Vulnerable Road Users and Connected Autonomous Vehicles Interaction: A Survey. Sensors; 2022; 22, 4614. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22124614] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35746397]

4. Technical Guidance for Child and Adolescent Road Safety. UNICEF. 2022; Available online: https://www.unicef.org/media/130721/file/UNICEF_Child_and_Adolescent_Road_Safety_Technical_Guidance_2022.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2023).

5. Road Accidents in India. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORTH), Government of India. 2022; Available online: https://morth.nic.in/sites/default/files/RA_2022_30_Oct.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2023).

6. India’s Road Crash Statistics: 2022 Overview. Save Life Foundation, New Delhi. 2022; Available online: https://savelifefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Indias-Road-Crash-Statistics_-2022-Overview.pdf (accessed on 1 December 2023).

7. Study on Rear Seat Belt Usage and Child Road Safety in India. Save Life Foundation, New Delhi. 2019; Available online: https://savelifefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Study-on-Rear-Seat-Belt-Usage-and-Child-Road-Safety-In-India.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2023).

8. Mondschein, A. Walking and Walkability in Delhi: Dissonance between Environmental Perception and Behavior. Transp. Res. Record; 2023; 2678, pp. 878-890. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03611981231210541]

9. Fallah Zavareh, M.; Barati, M.; Mamdoohi, A.; Abraham, M. The Role of Walkability, Socio-Economic and Parental Cognitive Characteristics in Long Walking Journeys to School. Transp. Res. Rec.; 2023; 2677, pp. 1473-1489. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03611981221104805]

10. Litman, T.A. Economic Value of Walkability. Transp. Res. Rec.; 2003; 1828, pp. 3-11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1828-01]

11. Gori, S.; Nigro, M.; Petrelli, M. Walkability Indicators for Pedestrian-Friendly Design. Transp. Res. Rec.; 2014; 2464, pp. 38-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2464-05]

12. Milad, M.; Amir Reza, M.; Trond, N. Walking time to school, children’s active school travel and their related factors. J. Transp. Health; 2017; 6, pp. 313-326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.01.012]

13. Nishant, S.; Vinod, V. Understanding school trip mode choice—The case of Kanpur (India). J. Transp. Geogr.; 2018; 66, pp. 283-290. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.12.007]

14. Strawderman, L.; Rahman, M.M.; Huang, Y.; Nandi, A. Driver behavior and accident frequency in school zones: Assessing the impact of sign saturation. Accid. Anal. Prev.; 2015; 82, pp. 118-125. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.026]

15. Tetali, S.; Edwards, P.; Roberts, G.V.S.M.I. How do children travel to school in urban India? A cross-sectional study of 5842 children in Hyderabad. BMC Public Health; 2016; 16, 1099. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3750-1] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27760532]

16. Na’asah, N.; Rahim, A.M.N. Travelling to School: Transportation Selection by Parents and Awareness towards Sustainable Transportation. Procedia Environ. Sci.; 2023; 17, pp. 392-400. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2013.02.052]

17. Zhu, X.; Lee, C. Walkability and safety around elementary schools economic and ethnic disparities. Am. J. Prev. Med.; 2008; 34, pp. 282-290. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.024] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18374241]

18. Lina, K.; Richard, T.; Shanti, A. Managing speed at school and playground zones. Accid. Anal. Prev.; 2011; 43, pp. 1887-1891. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.009]

19. Panter, J.R.; Jones, A.P.; Van Sluijs, E.M.; Griffin, S.J. Neighborhood, route, and school environments and children’s active commuting. Am. J. Prev. Med.; 2010; 38, pp. 268-278. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.040]

20. Duperrex, O.; Bunn, F.; Roberts, I. Safety education of pedestrians for injury prevention: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ; 2002; 324, 1129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7346.1129]

21. Zeedyk, M.S.; Wallace, L.; Carcary, B.; Jones, K.; Larter, K. Children and road safety: Increasing knowledge does not improve behaviour. Br. J. Educ. Psychol.; 2001; 71, pp. 573-594. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709901158686]

22. Ampofo-Boateng, K.; Thomson, J.A. Children’s perception of safety and danger on the road. Br. J. Psychol.; 1991; 82, pp. 487-505. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02415.x]

23. Kraidi, R.; Evdorides, H. Pedestrian safety models for urban environments with high roadside activities. Saf. Sci.; 2020; 130, 104847. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104847]

24. Mukherjee, D.; Mitra, S. Evaluation of pedestrian satisfaction level at signalized intersections in perspective of pedestrian fatality risk: An experience in Kolkata City, India. J. East. Asia Soc. Transp. Stud.; 2019; 13, pp. 2049-2072. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.11175/easts.13.2049]

25. Teknomo, K. Application of Microscopic Pedestrian Simulation Model. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav.; 2006; 9, pp. 15-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2005.08.006]

26. Deluka-Tibljaš, A.; Šurdonja, S.; Ištoka Otković, I.; Campisi, T. Child-Pedestrian Traffic Safety at Crosswalks—Literature Review. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 1142. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14031142]

27. Christiansen, L.B.; Toftager, M.; Schipperijn, J.; Ersbøll, A.K.; Giles-Corti, B.; Troelsen, J. School Site Walkability and Active School Transport: Association, Mediation, and Moderation. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2014; 34, pp. 7-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.10.012]

28. Hume, C.; Timperio, A.; Salmon, J.; Carver, A.; Giles-Corti, B.; Crawford, D. Walking and cycling to school: Predictors of increases among children and adolescents. Am. J. Prev. Med.; 2009; 36, pp. 195-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.10.011] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19162431]

29. Kerr, J.; Rosenberg, D.; Sallis, J.F.; Saelens, B.E.; Frank, L.D.; Conway, T.L. Active commuting to school: Associations with environment and parental concerns. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.; 2006; 38, pp. 787-794. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000210208.63565.73]

30. Ewing, R.; Schroeer, W.; Greene, W. School Location and Student Travel Analysis of Factors Affecting Mode Choice. Transp. Res. Rec.; 2004; 1895, pp. 55-63. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1895-08]

31. Clifton, K.J.; Kreamer-Fults, K. An examination of the environmental attributes associated with pedestrian-vehicular crashes near public schools. Accid. Anal Prev.; 2007; 39, pp. 708-715. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.11.003]

32. Collins, D.; Kearns, R. Geographies of Inequality: Child Pedestrian Injury and Walking School Buses in Auckland, New Zealand. Soc. Sci. Med.; 2005; 60, pp. 61-69. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.04.015]

33. Anderson, C.; Boarnet, M.G.; McMillan, T.E.; Alfonzo, M.; Day, K.M. Walking and automobile traffic near schools: Data to support evaluating school pedestrian safety programs. Proceedings of the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board; Washington, DC, USA, 12–16 January 2003.

34. Russell, T.; Westbrook, T.; Swain, D. Child Pedestrian Safety En Route to and from Schools: A Case Study. Published Research Report, Child Accident prevention Foundation, New Zealand. 1999; Available online: https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/server/api/core/bitstreams/3a6290b2-698a-42cb-8b95-242e34f42326/content (accessed on 1 December 2023).

35. Ištoka Otković, I.; Deluka-Tibljaš, A.; Šurdonja, S.; Campisi, T. Development of Models for Children—Pedestrian Crossing Speed at Signalized Crosswalks. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 777. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13020777]

36. IRC 103-2012 Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities; Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2012.

37. IRC SP: 32 Manual for Safer Commute to Schools; Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2019.

38. IRC:35-2015 Code of Practice for Road Markings (Second Revision); Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2015.

39. IRC:67-2022 Code of Practice for Road Signs (Third Revision); Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2022.

40. IRC:86-2018 Geometric Design Standards for Urban Roads and Streets; Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2018.

41. IRC: SP:43-2022 Guidelines on Low-Cost Traffic Management Technique for Urban Areas; Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2022.

42. Indo-HCM. Indian Highway Capacity Manual. Central Roads Research Institute, New Delhi, 2018. Available online: https://trid.trb.org/View/1509422#:~:text=The%20goal%20of%20this%20research,road%20facilities%20and%20pedestrian%20facilities (accessed on 11 January 2023).